See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: Jan
JS: We had the Directors meeting
last Wednesday
... Our implmentation report was accepted with minor
changes
... The next stage is publishing the proposed
recommendation
... Which should be soon
http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/CR20/ImplementationReport
JS: Exit criteria split into two
section...2013 Exit Criteria and 2015 Exit Criteria
... Also...
... In the document itself, we clarified in the References that
ATAG's references to UAAG and to WCAG are normative, while the
rest remain informative.
... And that was just to be consistent because in the SC, they
are already declared normative.
... So this change was not judged to be substantive
AC: Question about ATAG-WG
charter....
... Does it make sense for ATAG-WG to be having input on
WAI2020 with such a short end-date?
JR: While I think its fine to have input into the WAI2020 process for as long as ATAG-WG is chartered...if it is a potential obstacle to rechartering, I am fine to remove that line..
<jeanne> +1
TB: That's fine
<alastc> +1
+1
TB: +1
AC: Another point raised is on
the process...
... The process re: voting and consensus would be better to
match the 2014 W3C process document.
<alastc> Link about the voting: http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#Votes
JS: Suggests changing the line in the ATAG-WG charter to align with the 2014 W3C Proccess document
+1
<alastc> good idea, +1
TB: +1
<jeanne> +1
<alastc> Regarding the "input to WAI 2020", I had assumed it would be after the end-date. Again, I wouldn't object to that being removed, it seems to be a general 'thing for WAI oriented members to do', rather than being ATAG specific.
AC: A suggested change that has been proposed is that ATAG-WG not be chartered to create task forces
<jeanne> I think we have no plans to create task forces
JR: Suggest removing the charter line to enter into task forces
+1
TB: +1
<alastc> +1
<jeanne> +1
AC: A suggested change is to remove the reference to good standing requirement
<alastc> Charter: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2015/draft_auwg_charter.html
http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#good-standing
JR: Let's update the reference to
the new link.
... Let's update the reference for the Good Standing requirment
to to the new link. (http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#good-standing)
<jeanne> +1
+1
<alastc> +1
TB: +1
JR: Other buisiness
... Other business?
... Next meeting, Monday July 27
JS: I'll be away
AC: I'm away
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140 of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/last Friday/last Wednesday/ Succeeded: s/I am fine to remove that time/I am fine to remove that line./ Succeeded: s/Happy Retirement to Tim!// Found Scribe: Jan Inferring ScribeNick: Jan WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AC Charter JR JS TB alastc jeanne You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Jutta T. Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2015JulSep/0011.html Got date from IRC log name: 20 Jul 2015 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/07/20-au-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]